Written Answers Thursday 12 June 2008

Scottish Executive

Agriculture

Willie Coffey (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what funding it has made available to farmers and others in rural areas in (a) Kilmarnock and Loudoun and (b) Scotland to support diversification of the rural economy in each year since 1999.

The Executive has supplied the following corrected answer:

Richard Lochhead: From 2000 to 2006, funding for diversification was provided by the Agricultural and Farm Business Development Schemes (ABDS/FBDS). The information you have requested is not held or readily available specifically for the Kilmarnock and Loudoun area, but a total of 39 FBDS projects were approved in the East Ayrshire local authority area during that period. This resulted in funding of £625,764 being awarded, levering total eligible investment of £1.655 million. Across Scotland as a whole, 1,150 projects were approved, with funding awarded of £21.95 million.

Alcohol Misuse

Ross Finnie (West of Scotland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to reduce the availability of cheap alcohol products in supermarkets.

Kenny MacAskill: I was pleased to learn that Ross Finnie shares my concerns about the impact cheap alcohol has on alcohol misuse in Scotland.

  I have already announced the government’s intention to crack down on irresponsible promotions in supermarkets and other off-sales premises. We will shortly consult on the detail of these proposals and once we have considered the outcome of the consultation, I shall bring forward regulations which I hope all parties will be able to support

Alcohol Misuse

Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13455 by Kenny MacAskill on 4 June 2008, how many people under the age of 18 have been caught with alcohol and voluntarily surrendered it to a police officer in the Lothians parliamentary region in each year since 2002, broken down by local authority area.

Kenny MacAskill: I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-13455 on 4 June 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

  The reply explained that if the alcohol is surrendered to the police, it is not an offence and so is not included in the recorded crime statistics held centrally. Some limited information may be available from the Lothian and Borders police force.

Central Heating Programme

Michael McMahon (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many installations under the central heating programme were completed in the public sector in (a) 2007-08 and (b) 2006-07, broken down by postal code area.

Stewart Maxwell: I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-13167 on 30 May 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

  There were no installations in the public sector in 2007-08 because the public sector scheme was completed in 2006-07 and all public sector installations in 2006-07 were installed by the Glasgow Housing Association, in the Glasgow postcode area (G).

Class Sizes

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it believes that Highland Council is right to propose to raise class sizes at Brora Primary School.

Maureen Watt: Class organisation is a matter for individual local authorities in light of local circumstances.

Class Sizes

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the proposal to raise class sizes at Brora Primary School is at odds with the policy of reducing class sizes.

Maureen Watt: The class organisation of particular schools is a matter for individual local circumstances. We have signed a concordat with local government which will see year on year progress towards reducing class sizes in primary 1 to primary 3 to a maximum of 18. The concordat recognises that the pace of implementation will vary across authorities depending on local circumstances and needs.

Class Sizes

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the proposal to raise class sizes at Brora Primary School is at odds with the outcome agreement between the Scottish Government and Highland Council.

Maureen Watt: No. Single outcome agreements do not specify the class structure to be employed in individual schools.

Class Sizes

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether local authorities have the right to cap the roll of a primary school and require pupils who would otherwise attend that school to attend another school when the purpose of such a capping measure is solely to prevent them from having to employ another teacher.

Maureen Watt: School admission arrangements, including issues of school capacity and teacher employment, are matters for local authorities to determine in light of local circumstances.

Class Sizes

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether local authorities are required to formally consult on any proposals which affect a school catchment area, as it may apply to any number of pupils resident within a given catchment area.

Maureen Watt: The circumstances in which local authorities are statutorily required to consult parents and other relevant parties on certain changes in educational matters are set out in the Education (Publication and Consultation etc)(Scotland) Regulations 1981. These include any proposal to vary a school’s delineated area, more commonly known as a catchment area.

Class Sizes

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it believes that parents should be consulted by local authorities on any proposals to cap the rolls of their schools.

Maureen Watt: The circumstances in which local authorities are statutorily required to consult parents and other relevant parties on certain changes in educational matters are set out in the Education (Publication and Consultation etc)(Scotland) Regulations 1981. These do not include proposals to cap the roll of schools. The Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Act 2006 places authorities under a duty to respond to and engage with a school’s Parent Council on matters about which the Parent Council expresses concern.

Drug Misuse

Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many class A drugs were seized in the Lothians parliamentary region in each of the last five years, broken down by (a) drug type and (b) value.

Kenny MacAskill: Data on Class A drugs is only available by police force area, and not by parliamentary region area.

  Figures for the years 2002 to 2006-07 are given in the publications listed below, copies of which are available in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre. The tables provide details of number of class A seizures by drug type and quantity of class A seizures by drug type. Information on the value of seizures is not available.

  

 Year of Seizures
 Publication
 Table
 Bib. Number


 2002
 Drug Misuse Statistics Scotland 2004
 E2.2
 36121


 2003
 Drug Misuse Statistics Scotland 2005
 D2.2
 38474


 2004-05 and 2005-06
 Drug Seizures by Scottish Police Forces, 2004-05 and 2005-06
 9, 12, 15, 18
 42386


 2005-06 and 2006-07
 Drug Seizures by Scottish Police Forces, 2005-06 and 2006-07
 9, 12, 15, 18
 45847

Efficient Government

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with local authorities on determining the specifics of efficiency savings.

John Swinney: The Scottish Government has regular discussions at official level with COSLA about the Efficient Government programme. The identification delivery of efficiency savings at local authority level is a matter for individual local authorities and will be subject to the scrutiny of external audit.

Fisheries

Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether its expert panel on alternatives to the common fisheries policy has consulted, or plans to consult, the European Commission.

Richard Lochhead: I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-13727 on 11 June 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

Fisheries

Trish Godman (West Renfrewshire) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13003 by Richard Lochhead on 27 May 2008, what precise amount was negotiated between the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency and the Polish shipyard in respect of liquidated damages for the late delivery of the vessel, Hirta.

Richard Lochhead: The Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency negotiated liquidated damages in the sum of £689,000 in respect of the late delivery of the vessel FPV Hirta.

Football

Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether is preparing for the possibility that Ukraine and Poland will not host Euro 2012 and, if so, what preparations it has made.

Stewart Maxwell: Informal discussions have been held with the Scottish Football Association but a feasibility study has not been commissioned.

Football

Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive which stadiums would receive funding for improvements if Scotland was given the opportunity to host Euro 2012.

Stewart Maxwell: This would be considered as part of any feasibility study.

Fuel Duty

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will reverse its decision not to follow the example of the Department for Transport in England and increase the Bus Services Operators Grant in line with any increase in fuel duty.

Stewart Stevenson: The Scottish Government will provide substantial funds to the bus industry of around £260 million each year. Each increase in fuel duty and its effect on the rate of Bus Service Operators Grant has to be looked at on an individual basis. Ministers are currently considering the future levels of Bus Service Operators Grant. Any changes to the increased level of funding that was set out in the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth’s budget statement on 6 February 2008 will be announced in due course.

Fuel Poverty

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to improve support for people in fuel poverty, particularly vulnerable groups such as the elderly and disabled, in light of increased energy prices.

Stewart Maxwell: The Fuel Poverty review published on 22 May by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing highlights that the fuel poverty programmes established by the previous administration are failing Scotland’s fuel poor; a situation exacerbated by the current high fuel prices. The Cabinet Secretary set out the actions that the Scottish Government will take to improve support for people in fuel poverty and get back on track to meet the 2016 fuel poverty target:

  Re-establish the Scottish Fuel Poverty Forum under an independent chair to advise on options for future policy direction;

  Prioritise the Central Heating Programme waiting list with immediate effect to give priority to the fuel poor, and allow headroom for reform;

  Extend the benefits health check to Warm Deal applicants, and

  Partner with Scottish Hydro Electric to secure £1.5 million Carbon Emissions Reduction Target funds to complement the Scottish fuel poverty programmes.

Further and Higher Education

Claire Baker (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how the discretionary funding provided to each higher or further education institution is calculated.

Fiona Hyslop: Higher Education (HE) Discretionary Funds

  HE Discretionary Funds are provided to higher and further education institutions and consist of:

  the Higher Education Childcare Fund

  the Undergraduate Discretionary Fund

  the Postgraduate Discretionary Fund

  the new Part-time Fund.

  Allocation of HE Childcare Fund is based on the number of Scottish domiciled undergraduate students and post-graduate teaching degree students (excluding those on courses in professions allied to medicine). Half of the fund is distributed according to the number of mature students at each institution and the other half according to the number of students receiving Lone Parent’s Grant.

  Undergraduate Discretionary Fund allocations are also based on two sets of criteria. Half of the fund is allocated based on full-time equivalent (FTE) number of UK undergraduate students at each institution. The other half is allocated based on the number of Scottish domiciled full-time undergraduate students whose household income is at or below the income threshold at which maximum Young Students’ Bursary is awarded.

  Postgraduate Discretionary Fund allocations are based on the FTE number of UK domiciled postgraduate students (both full and part-time time).

  For session 2008-09 a new Discretionary Fund is being introduced for part-time students only. Allocations for this fund are based on part-time FTEs at each institution. This is similar to the method used for the Undergraduate Discretionary Fund.

  Further Education (FE) Discretionary Funds

  FE Discretionary Funds are provided to FE institutions and are allocated as follows:

  50% by each college’s share of FESUMs;

  30% by each college’s share of FE students from the 20% most deprived areas (head count) taken from the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, and

  20% according to each college’s share of FE Students (head count).

  FE activity is measured in SUMs (student units of measurement) as used by the Scottish Funding Council (SFC). Each FE SUM represents FE study as per SCQF measurements up to and including level 6.

  The data used in the allocation of the Discretionary Funds comes from the Student Awards Agency for Scotland, the Higher Education Statistics Agency and the SFC’s Further Education Statistics collection.

Housing

Alasdair Morgan (South of Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it has taken to encourage the growth of housing trusts.

Stewart Maxwell: The Scottish Government currently provides funding for two rural housing trusts through its Housing Voluntary Sector Grants scheme. In 2008-09 Dumfries and Galloway Small Communities Housing Trust has been offered funding of £60,000 and Highlands Small Communities Housing Trust has been offered £65,000.

Housing

Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many people within the Lothians parliamentary region it estimates will be helped by the Low-cost Initiative for First Time Buyers in 2008-09.

Stewart Maxwell: Information on the number of people estimated to be helped by the Low-cost Initiative for First Time Buyers in 2008-09 is not held by parliamentary region. Data is held at local authority level over this time period.

  The Scottish Government plans to approve 394 affordable homes for sale in the Lothians during the financial year 2008-09. This is broken down as follows:

  East Lothian: 50

  Midlothian: 45

  West Lothian: 55

  Edinburgh: 244.

  Note that the figures provided in this answer were also provided in response to S3W-13195 on 2 June 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search.

Justice

Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what correspondence it has entered into since 14 May 2008 with the Department for Work and Pensions concerning the public inquiry into the Stockline disaster.

Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive on what dates since 14 May 2008 it has (a) discussed and (b) corresponded on the issue of the Stockline disaster with the Department for Work and Pensions.

Kenny MacAskill: I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-13722 on 11 June 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

Ministerial Engagements

Rhona Brankin (Midlothian) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what engagements the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change had on 30 May 2008.

Stewart Stevenson: On 30 May 2008 I had one engagement. I attended the opening of Artemis Intelligent Power Limited, at Loanhead, Midlothian.

NHS Waiting Lists

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many of the 20,931 out-patients and the 2,452 in-patients that were removed from the New Ways waiting list in the first quarter of 2008 were removed for each of the reasons under WT28 codes 20, 21, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42 and 43.

Nicola Sturgeon: The information requested is shown in the following tables. The information provided is a breakdown of 20,931 out-patients and 2,452 in-patients and day cases and only relates to patients who were returned to the care of their GP and the reasons.

  Information relating to Code 43 - inappropriate addition to list - was not presented in the New Ways statistics published on 27 May 2008, but was included in the total number of removals from the waiting list. The number of patients removed from the waiting list under Code 43 for the quarter ending 31 March 2008, was 18,608 for new out-patients and 4,703 for in-patients and day cases.

  There are data quality issues around the statistics relating to reasons why patients have been removed from waiting lists. Consequently the data provided is provisional and is expected to change when the next set of statistics is published at the end of August 2008. Details of the quality issues can be found at http://www.isdscotland.org/isd/5573.html

  NHSScotland: Number Of New Out-Patients Removed From Waiting List, and Recorded Under Reason for Removal Codes: Quarter Ending 31 March 2008P

  

 Removal Reason
 Removal Reason Description
 Quarter Ending31 March 2008P


 Code 20
 Referred back to GP – Social unavailability1
 2,387


 Code 21
 Referred back to GP – Medical unavailability1
 99


 Code 37
 Referred back to GP – Could not attend2
 3,156


 Code 38
 Referred back to GP – Did not attend
 11,867


 Code 40
 Referred back to GP – Refused ‘reasonable offer’
 49


 Code 41
 Referred back to GP – No response to offer
 1,960


 Code 42
 Referred back to GP – Inappropriate referral
 1,413



  PProvisional: It is known that the accuracy of recording of these codes has varied by NHS board and these figures should be used with caution.

  Source: Waiting Times Data Warehouse, ISD Scotland.

  Notes:

  1. No end date known for period of unavailability. Unless clinically inappropriate the patient is returned to GP care.

  2. Patient asked to reschedule appointment on three or more occasions. Unless clinically inappropriate the patient is returned to GP care.

  NHSScotland: Number Of In-Patients and Day Cases Removed from Waiting List, and Recorded Under Reason for Removal Codes: Quarter Ending 31 March 2008P

  

 Removal Reason
 Removal Reason Description
 Quarter Ending31 March 2008P


 Code 20
 Referred back to GP – Social unavailability1
 341


 Code 21
 Referred back to GP – Medical unavailability1
 179


 Code 37
 Referred back to GP – Could not attend2
 120


 Code 38
 Referred back to GP – Did not attend
 1,338


 Code 40
 Referred back to GP – Refused ‘reasonable offer’
 205


 Code 41
 Referred back to GP – No response to offer
 55


 Code 42
 Referred back to GP – Inappropriate referral
 214



  PProvisional: It is known that the accuracy of recording of these codes has varied by NHS board and these figures should be used with caution.

  Source: Waiting Times Data Warehouse, ISD Scotland.

  Notes:

  1. No end date known for period of unavailability. Unless clinically inappropriate the patient is returned to GP care.

  2. Patient asked to reschedule appointment on three or more occasions. Unless clinically inappropriate the patient is returned to GP care.

National Planning Framework

Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive when it plans to bring forward a parliamentary debate on the second National Planning Framework.

John Swinney: We intend to lay the proposed National Planning Framework before Parliament after the summer recess, following which there will be a 60 day period for parliamentary consideration.

Older People

Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that changes in the allocations formula for the funding of local government addresses the needs of elderly people in the Inverclyde area.

John Swinney: The current formula, which is arrived at and agreed between national and local government, is needs-based and reflects the most relevant and up-to-date information currently available for each area. As I have already advised Parliament, I intend to undertake a review of the local government finance funding formula jointly with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities in time for the next three-year settlement in 2011-12.

Planning

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answers to questions S3W-11249 and S3W-12807 by Michael Russell on 22 April and 21 May 2008 respectively, on what precise date in early December 2007 officials learned that the Laurel Grant Ltd application was to be considered by Cairngorms National Park Authority.

Michael Russell: The agenda and supporting papers for the Cairngorms National Park Authority’s Planning Committee on 14 December 2007 were forwarded to officials on 7 December 2007. These were placed in the public domain by Cairngorms National Park Authority on 6 December 2007. The information was not specific to the Laurel Grant application and referred to a number of development applications which were to be considered by the Cairngorms National Park Authority.

Planning

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answers to questions S3W-11249 and S3W-12807 by Michael Russell on 22 April and 21 May 2008 respectively, what steps were taken by officials, on learning of the development application from Laurel Grant Ltd, to inform authorities dealing with the application from Aviemore Highland Resort of the potential conflict between the two applications.

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answers to questions S3W-11249 and S3W-12807 by Michael Russell on 22 April and 21 May 2007 respectively, on what precise date officials became aware of a potential conflict of interest between developers seeking to attract the same supermarket to rival proposals for retail developments in Aviemore.

Michael Russell: Scottish Government officials only became aware of a potential conflict subsequent to the Cairngorms National Park Authority granting planning permission on 11 January 2008. Attention was specifically drawn to the issue of conflict in correspondence from the developer dated 5 February 2008.

Planning

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether ministers who met representatives of Aviemore Highland Resort to discuss the planning application it had put forward to the Cairngorms National Park Authority (a) made a formal declaration of interest or (b) reported their attendance at the meeting to the (i) First Minister, (ii) Permanent Secretary or (iii) Chief Planner and on what precise dates these declarations or reports were made.

Michael Russell: There was no requirement to do so.

Planning

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answers to questions S3W-11249 and S3W-12807 by Michael Russell on 22 April and 21 May 2007 respectively, what steps were taken by authorities dealing with the application from Aviemore Highland Resort, on learning of the development application from Laurel Grant Ltd, to inform Scottish Government officials and, through them, ministers of any potential conflict between the two applications.

Michael Russell: Determination of the application was at all times an issue solely for the Cairngorms National Park Authority. Any question about the actions taken by the Cairngorms National Park Authority should be directed to its chief executive.

Planning

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the content of the email sent by the Minister for Community Safety in a constituency member capacity to the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Development at 11:57am on 6 December 2007 was made known to (a) planning officials, (b) the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and (c) the Cairngorms National Park Authority and, if so, what action these respective officials and bodies took in response to the matters raised in the email.

Michael Russell: The content of the email was made known to Scottish Government planning officials. The email was not relayed to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Cairngorms National Park Authority. In response to representations received from several members of the Scottish Parliament, including the Minister for Community Safety acting in a constituency capacity, and from a member of the United Kingdom Parliament, the Environment Minister contacted the Scottish Environment Protection Agency on 7 December 2007 to ask if there were any misunderstandings or matters of process within SEPA that were unnecessarily delaying the agency’s consideration of the Aviemore Highland Resort’s planning applications. Any questions about the actions taken by SEPA or the Cairngorms National Park Authority should be directed to the respective Chief Executives.

Public Bodies

George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive which of the public bodies abolished since May 2007 have been incorporated into its central establishment and how many staff have been transferred as a consequence.

John Swinney: In October 2007, the Scottish Government published a comprehensive baseline of 199 national public sector organisations and committed to a reduction in this number of 25% by 2011. The number of public bodies has to date reduced by 31 organisations.

  The Scottish Building Standards Agency; Scottish Agricultural Science Agency; Communities Scotland, with the exception of their regulation function, and the Fire Services Inspectorate have been absorbed into the core Scottish Government, although already part of the Scottish Government main bargaining unit. The number of staff that transferred to the core Scottish Government for each of these are:

  

 Scottish Building Standards Agency
 33


 Scottish Agricultural Science Agency
 145


 Communities Scotland*
 304


 Fire Services Inspectorate
 7



  Note: *Sixty-one staff also transferred to the newly created Scottish Housing Regulator.

Student Finance

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to the first supplementary to question S3O-3427 by Fiona Hyslop on 22 May 2007 ( Official Report c. 8925), what (a) information technology and (b) administrative functions at the Student Awards Agency for Scotland would have been adversely affected by an attempt to run two systems of means testing for student loans and bursaries concurrently.

Fiona Hyslop: Both the current grants for Scottish students operating system and its replacement student entitlement processing system would have required expenditure and rewriting, adding to the complexity of these systems and the need for additional rigorous testing.

  In relation to administrative functions, in order to run two separate means tests, SAAS would have to develop two separate application forms to ensure that all the correct information on the income assessment was collected for each students.

  There is no way that SAAS can identify potential new students, which would include those returning to study after a break of a year or more, and therefore cannot control the information or applications given out to these students. From a processing point of view, this could lead to an increase in provisional assessments as SAAS await the correct information and the correct application form.

  There is also the added complication of two siblings being assessed using two different means tests. The administration involved in ensuring that different members of one family completed the correct application form, combined with the problem of having to explain why different information is required for each student in the family and why they would be receiving different levels of support, could only lead to complaints.

  There is therefore not only a risk of the wrong payment being made, but an increase in the volume of workload for SAAS, who would also have to reassess such cases. This is a hugely complicated system and any increase in the processing and administration of applications could potentially lead to delays in payments to students.

  Communicating the two different means tests through Information Advice and Guidance would be very complicated as would the management of how and who this is targeted at. There are various ways that students can receive information on student support, but we have no way of knowing that they are receiving the correct information.

  There would also be an impact on the training required within SAAS, as well as significant work on the existing training package for case working staff.

  I would also refer the member to the answer to question S3W-13589 on 12 June 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search

Student Finance

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to the first supplementary to question S3O-3427 by Fiona Hyslop on 22 May 2007 ( Official Report , c. 8926), what difficulties to parents and students it considers may have been averted by its decision not to run two systems of means testing for student loans and bursaries concurrently.

Fiona Hyslop: The Scottish Government has averted a number of difficulties to parents and students by its decision to not run two systems of means testing for student loans and bursaries concurrently. These include:

  1. By running with one system, we are ensuring that we are no longer discriminating against married couples and civil partners. This is because if we were running two systems we would be taking account of spouse’s income in all cases but only partners income in some cases. Having one system ensures that partners’ income will be treated in the same way as that of a spouse or civil partner. As a result of this, students with partners will be eligible for the same support as students with spouses or civil partners.

  2. Two systems of means-testing would mean that many continuing students would miss out on the initiative of extending the young students’ bursary to students under 25 with children. The single system ensures that some continuing students will benefit from this change.

  3. In cases where a family has more than one student, this means that the parents will only have to provide one set of information. It also means that both students will be assessed on the same basis and receive the same level of support.

  4. Running with one system ensures that all students are assessed on a level footing and the same income assessment will be applied regardless of level of study.

  5. There is no risk of students and parents completing the incorrect application form. There are various ways that students can receive information on student support but we have no way of knowing that they are receiving the correct information. With one system of means-testing there is only one application form for students and parents. This ensures that students are using, and receiving, the correct information, advice and guidance and the appropriate application form. It is also means that students are better able to identify what funding they can expect. The advice and guidance literature and the website are simpler and easier to understand. This ensures that the correct application form is used and no delays occur as a result of having to re-submit the correct application along with additional documentary evidence.

  6. Students are less likely to experience delays in their application for support. Running two systems of means-testing increases the volume of work for SAAS. While SAAS can take steps to ensure there is minimum impact in the processing and administration of applications, it cannot legislate for students and parents applying under the incorrect means-test. This could potentially lead to delays in payments to students if they were required to re-submit the correct application

Student Finance

Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many disabled students were not eligible for the disabled students allowance for each academic year from 2001-02 to 2007-08.

Fiona Hyslop: The number of disabled students who applied and were not eligible for the Disabled Students Allowance (DSA) for each academic years from 2001-02 to 2007-08 is provided in the following tables. The statistics contained within the tables are broken by the reason why the student was not eligible for DSA.

  

 2001-02
 


 Course not SAAS funded
 4


 Late Application / Report received too late
 9


 EU Students / not eligible residence
 1


 No confirmation of disability/no recommendations
 4


 Total not eligible
 18



  

 2002-03
 


 Course not SAAS funded
 3


 Late Application / Report received too late
 2


 EU Students / not eligible residence
 2


 No confirmation of disability/no recommendations
 4


 Total not eligible
 11



  

 2003-04
 


 Course not SAAS funded
 3


 EU Students / not eligible residence
 4


 No confirmation of disability/no recommendations
 6


 Large Items paid previously
 5


 Total not eligible
 18



  

 2004-05
 


 Course not SAAS funded
 3


 No confirmation of disability/no recommendations
 2


 Large Items paid previously
 1


 Total not eligible
 6



  

 2005-06
 


 Course not SAAS funded
 4


 Late Application / Report received too late
 2


 EU Students / not eligible residence
 4


 No confirmation of disability/no recommendations
 7


 Total not eligible
 17



  

 2006-07
 


 Course not SAAS funded
 2


 EU Students / not eligible residence
 1


 Total not eligible
 3



  

 2007-08
 


 EU Students / not eligible residence
 3


 No confirmation of disability/no recommendations
 2


 Total not eligible (at this stage in the academic year)
 5



  Source: These statistics were manually collated from SAAS data.

Voluntary Sector

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of the trends in funding support to the voluntary sector in Glasgow and how such support will be affected as a result of the Scottish budget.

John Swinney: Support for the third sector in Glasgow is primarily a matter for the Council, through the community planning partnership.

  We are working with COSLA, SoLACE and SCVO in a group whose aim is to strengthen the relationship between the third sector and the public sector, locally, in the context of the new relationship between the Scottish Government and local government.

  The Scottish Budget underpins our view that decisions on local delivery are best made at the local level with shared outcomes contributed to by the public, private and third sectors. The removal of ring fencing reduces costs of bureaucracy and allows greater efficiency.